Covid-19 Central
- Thread starter Madeleine
- Start date
orejon4
Well-Known Member
As an old man getting up in years, I'll err on the side of caution.
Bliss
Well-Known Member
Yes. No joke, there are actually people who think that drinking the beer means you will develop the virus.
This made me chuckle..
Madeleine
Well-Known Member
Caution yes, panick no;-)!
samson1701
Well-Known Member
I feel you. My immune system is usually pretty good. People around me can have all matter of colds and flu and I generally won't catch it. Or, I'll just have a sniffle or something. But, because of my condition, my respiratory system is noticeably compromised. So, if I were to catch it, it could be very dangerous for me very quickly. Plus, I rely on public transportation to get most places. It is a bit scary.
Plus side; because of my condition, my arms are too weak to raise to my face naturally. I can do it. I just have to work to do it and I think before I act. So, I pretty much never touch my face when I'm out. Maybe, to push my glasses up and I do that by the arms of my frames rather than the center of my nose. Also, I keep hand sanitizer and hand wipes with me. Los Angeles is like the homeless capital of the world. Shit is sketchy on a good day, let alone during a pandemic. Busses and shit can be like petri dishes on wheels.
People don't realize how that long incubation period changes the game. W.H.O. declared it dangerous, not because of how many people it's killed, but because how many people it could kill and how easy it is to pass it before you could even have a hint of being sick.
Madeleine
Well-Known Member
For real. I’m so mad with them. The whole world is paying for their nasty food preferences.
Secondly, I’m thinking if we can’t kill all the bats. Bats harbour all types of deadly viruses because of their metabolism. Ebola originated in bats as well. If we could wipe them out we might solve some future problems. The animal lovers won’t like to hear that though.
Beasty
Well-Known Member
If we didn't need bats I would be all for it. From what I understand, getting rid of all the bats would have serious consequences on insect control and crop production. Bats help to reseed forests, pollinate plants and keep the insect population down. I also think that they generally stay away from humans and we put ourselves at risk for going into their domains. Our only good choice here is to try to modify human behavior with some serious fines or jail time.
I agree that having a love for animals isn't enough to base a decision on. It's really wild that all living things do serve a purpose except for us. The only thing that we can likely get rid of that makes sense on a risk vs reward level is mosquitoes. Seems like they are more of a risk than asset even though they do serve a purpose, the purpose seems rather small and replaceable in the grand scheme of things.
Also when you consider that some viruses can be spread by mosquitoes I imagine Ebola being spread that way instead of malaria (possibilities). Viruses mutate and I don't know the limits of such mutations, if one virus can do it what's stopping the others? What is clear is that all of the properties that viruses have that allows for their transmission poses a serious threat to us especially considering how deadly a virus can be. Some of them also threaten our food sources.
Kill all of the mosquitoes if possible. There are other living things that I wish we didn't actually need.
The Dark King
Well-Known Member
So am I still chicken little when they are locking down in Italy? This is getting scary af. It's not the disease I'm worried about its how people will react. If the cases rise even half as quickly as Italy we are in for some bad times. We are a panic culture with a sea of guns
Bliss
Well-Known Member
Why are you scared? If you have a gun you'll be fine. No one will come and steal your Lysol and Purell. Or Spam. Or TP.
Italy's different than America. Our Govt began quarantining flights back in January and stopped flights from China.
I don't think Italy stopped all the Chinese tourists coming in, in time.
Speaking of which, l had a conversation with my best friend who's Italian and a flight attendant and she said that Easter is the biggest tourism time, what with going to the Vatican and such. Her airline has asked them if they want to take voluntary leave.
Jerusalem too has shut down because they don't want anyone infected coming there.
One person at Cpac had it.
SXSW was cxld losing $300 million into their economy, Seattle is on lockdown, schools too. Except for China and Italy, it's all an overreaction, don't you think?
Ironically, this will blow over come summertime. The virus doesn't survive in heat.
The Dark King
Well-Known Member
It's not the virus its how people react that's concerning. And we're at the beginning of March we have a long while before we get to summer
Bliss
Well-Known Member
What exactly are you suggesting people's reactions are going to be? To what?
andreboba
Well-Known Member
So why did Dear Leader Trump cut funding for the CDC if global pandemics are almost predictable???
Bliss
Well-Known Member
Fixed for you..
- In FY 2010, the budget request for CDC funding was $6.31 billion.
- In FY 2011, it was $6.26 billion.
- In FY 2012, the budget request was $5.81 billion
- In FY 2013, the budget request was $4.99 billion...
Obama Also Pushed For CDC Cuts In Years Before Ebola Outbreak
By Sam Stein and Zach Carter
10/15/2014 12:50 PM ET HuffingtonPost.com
But hey AB, that's what presidents do when they try to manage the budget - they cut here and they add there.
President Trump has increased funding for the CDC overall. Yes, he cut from specific CDC departments but he also added to others, eg: vaccines funding was increased, HIV funding and Opioid funding was increased, to name a few...
Furthermore, he requested budget cuts, which is always just the starting point, however when lawmakers requested funding, he's approved it.
He also approved $8.5 billion for this outbreak.
So, you don't know what you're talking about and hence you're the fake news President Trump talks about.
Bliss
Well-Known Member
Trump signs $8.3 billion funding package to fight coronavirus, may visit CDC HQ
By Yaron Steinbuch
By Yaron Steinbuch
President Trump on Friday signed into law an $8.3 billion emergency funding package to combat the coronavirus outbreak — providing funds for state and local authorities to combat the spread of the illness, which has killed at least 14 people across 21 states in the US.
“So we’re signing the 8.3 billion. I asked for two and a half and I got 8.3 and I’ll take it,” Trump said at the Diplomatic Room in the White House, where he was accompanied by Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar.
The package includes more than $3 billion for research and development of vaccines, test kits and medical treatments; $2.2 billion to help public-health activities on prevention, preparedness and response; and $1.25 billion to aid international efforts aimed at stemming the spread of the virus.
It also authorizes an additional $500 million in waivers for Medicare “telehealth” restrictions to allow sick people to get treatment without visiting physicians.
The amount in the bill substantially exceeds the $2.5 billion in emergency funding the White House earlier proposed.
